General Relativity gets it wrong - Redux pt n-million

[neilwilkes]

See this interesting article...
http://refreshingnews9.blogspot.com/201 ... heory.html

Seems that there is another problem with GR and it's "predictions" again.
Quelle surprise. not.

How does this new test result fit in with EU theory, please?

[Harry Costas]

G'day

Thank you for that information, very interesting.

[Solar]

Yes, thank you; that is interesting. Here is the same results mentioned 4yrs ago:

Gravitomagnetic Field in Spinning Superconductor ("Gravitomagnetic London Moment") could challenge General Relativity and Point Toward Quantum Theory of Gravity

Here is an interview with the Dr. from that earlier timeframe:
Dr. Martin Tajmar Interview: Warp-Drives, Antigravity, and FTL

[Harry Costas]

G'day

Thanks

You got to love this site.

People are willing to share their reading and remain humble.

[Frost]

Anyone know anything about this?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 131125.htm

They say that it confirms GR and QM predictions "to an accuracy of about one part in 100 million"

[tholden]

As I understand it, this is what Ralph Sansbury claims to be the case.

[tholden]

Sansbury's theory available for download as a .doc file:

http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns/

[beekeeper]

e=mc2 a very popular Einstein formula sailing through the universal science for some time,has had the wind removed from it's sail, in the Electric Univers? When electricity is inserted in the equation E becomes many times larger then the rest of the equation unless we review the mass of the stars and galaxies. Einstein is right no, yes, no maybe.....hum

[beekeeper]

Greetings to all electrosapiens, celebrations are the order of the day, for the super Hadron particle accelerator is back on line and it didn't blow a breaker. We are, with the help of this magnificent technological marvel , about to recreate the moment the univers came to be. Two things jump to my mind. First one being that without electricity the scientist would have to establish some serious olympic records to run the particles to one another at the speed they would need.
Secondly according to established theories meticulously calculated by Einstein in his relativity theory, nothing can go faster then the speed of light as it would gain infinite mass in the process. When you collide two particles each going at an estimated 90% plus of the speed of light the energy created contradict or at the very least defy any natural phenomena in an ever expanding univers. So is the speed of light just another hurdle, like the speed of sound was 70 yrs ago? Or did we just spend so much time effort and money to finally achieve the means to anihilate every pounds of knowledge and grams of spirit we ever were as parts and parcels of this Universe?

[FS3]

Are you sure that this site is not a deliberate misinterpretation?

@neilwilkes :

Seems that there is another problem with GR and it's "predictions" again.

A short check-up of the latest papers by Tajmar on that topic "General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology" shows nothing thelike:

http://arxiv.org/find/gr-qc/1/au:+Tajma ... /0/all/0/1

E.g. one from 2009:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.1033.pdf


From 2007 (the laboratory-pic on your source-website is from THAT paper!):
http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0610/0610015.pdf

Here, even on the contrary, this latest paper suggests quite the opposite, as you can read --

...And our experimental results should not be too surprising as they are predicted by Einstein's GRT and the presently observed amount of of dark energy in the Universe...

Me thinks it would be wise to check again the source, or trying to contact the "interpretor" of the website you mentioned and ask him for further clarification.

FS3

[tholden]

Are you sure that this site is not a deliberate misinterpretation?

........

Me thinks it would be wise to check again the source, or trying to contact the "interpretor" of the website you mentioned and ask him for further clarification.

FS3

The original article is dated 06. This appears to follow a sort of a pattern which I've noticed over th eyears: some little bit of reality somehow or other rears its ugly head somewhere, and the lid gets slammed shut again as everybody in the picture starts to worry about paradigms and careers and what not.

The first version of an experiment like this I've read about came about in the 90s and involved a Russian physicist by the name of Podkletnov who was at a Finnish university at the time. Podkletnov has gotten much harder to get interviews with since that time and some figure Russian government involvement.

[beekeeper]

I get the vague feeling that many of the members of this web site cary a resentment against Einstein and his theories. If I may take a step back in time, I would like to point out that Einstein Theories and calculations were a major factor in the development of the nuclear and thermo nuclear weapons. When he calculated that any mass traveling faster then the speed of light would gain infinite mass it would consequently gain infinite energies.
Now going back to my previous posting I sugest that the scientists that have created the Super Hadron collider, and are now putting it in operation are ignoring a basic principle of the theory they are trying to explore.
As they proceed to actifate trillions of volts in such an enclosed environment, when we put this in the perspective of an electric universe, they are seriously disrupting the natural flow of energies in, to say the least, that small area of the planet. All things being connected in the earth magnetic field this disruption will have some form of consequences on the rest of the planet. I do not believe they they, most if not all of these so called scientists, have no interest in an electric univers, I don not believe that htey would have entered this possibility in their equation. I prsonnally thing that they may be way over their heads on this one. For instance the latest rash of earthquakes and floodings htat has cause so much grieve and destruction in such a short period of time as well as the very disturbing weather patterns that we have all been part of lately. The Hadrom collider is in my mind a very unatural way of probing nature where the likely hood of two particles colliding at close to twice the speed of light is an impossibility in an ever expanding universe.

[earls]

The effects of the concentrations of energies within the LHC are a fraction of .001% that the "experiment" could possibly have on the Earth. You might as well start babbling about artificial black holes.

[beekeeper]

Thank you for the input earl, but taking a small step backward the nuclear energy and weapon race started in Chicago in a small experimental reactor and developed into the massive destruction capacity we have today and the equally massive nuclear waste accumulation we also acquired.

Please take a look at another posting I inserted in the "a spin on earthquake" topic .

[neilwilkes]

Are you sure that this site is not a deliberate misinterpretation?

@neilwilkes :

Seems that there is another problem with GR and it's "predictions" again.

A short check-up of the latest papers by Tajmar on that topic "General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology" shows nothing thelike:

http://arxiv.org/find/gr-qc/1/au:+Tajma ... /0/all/0/1

E.g. one from 2009:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.1033.pdf


From 2007 (the laboratory-pic on your source-website is from THAT paper!):
http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0610/0610015.pdf

Here, even on the contrary, this latest paper suggests quite the opposite, as you can read --

...And our experimental results should not be too surprising as they are predicted by Einstein's GRT and the presently observed amount of of dark energy in the Universe...

Me thinks it would be wise to check again the source, or trying to contact the "interpretor" of the website you mentioned and ask him for further clarification.

FS3

I certainly will - especially in light of the post detailing the experiment done in 2006 (and it is indeed the same one)
seems to give a somewhat different interpretation.
I will post the reply if I get one.
Thanks for the additional info - much appreciated, as always.